FF does not fit in an RX-1, that's why it has a fixed lens. The lens includes the optical path for the light to get to the FF sensor. LEICA = smart engineering and their FF body is the size of the 6D minus the viewfinder.

Your examples prove what I am saying and you are not understanding. Fixed lenses to accommodate the approximately 35mm or 1.38" optical path minimum required between the FF sensor (35mm film) and the last lens element. Add packaging for the body case and electronics and you are at around 1.75-2.00 inches minimum for a FF. Film was easier, you could pretty much have the film slide along the back of the camera, not so with a sensor.

I do understand. We are talking of mirrorless here. No need for a lot of space betwenn rear lens element and sensor plane.

Whether "the light path is built into" a non-interchangeable prime lens stuck unto the body or into an interchangeable lens mounted via a lens mount makes no difference whatsover. Except the first "solution" yielda a dumb, inflexible single focal length camera and the second solution yields a versatile camera-system. :-)

Flange back for Leica M for example is is 27.8mm. I am quite sure 20mm are also doable with some smart microlens array and proper lens-design. And if the rear lens elements would stick somewhat into the camera body, the camera could be as thin as an RX-1 and the lenses could be really slim as well.

And that's exactly what I want. And what the overwhelming majority of the market wants.

I will definitely NOT waste time and money moving from my current Canon APS-C DSLR plus lens assortment (EF-S, EF) to a Canon APS-C mirrorless plus new lens assortment (EF-M) to finally a Canon FF mirrorless ILC Camera ("EF-really right") with still another lens assortment. No way!

1. I want to skip purchase of another DSLR 2. I want to skip purhcasing any further APS-C cameras3. I want to move right on to a compact, hi-performance FF mirrorless ILC with * excellent sensor* fast contrast+in-sensor-plane Phase-AF* hi-end EVF * full ergonomic controls [i.e. 2 wheels! ] * at max. 1/3 of the cost of a Leica M system - so basically at the price of Sony RX-1

The first company to offer this, will be my next camera system vendor. :-)

Notify me when these avai. on the market. I'll be busy shooting with my RX1 til then

I'll bet 25cents that Canon will NOT be the first....my take is Sony or Fuji

And that's exactly what I want. And what the overwhelming majority of the market wants.

I will definitely NOT waste time and money moving from my current Canon APS-C DSLR plus lens assortment (EF-S, EF) to a Canon APS-C mirrorless plus new lens assortment (EF-M) to finally a Canon FF mirrorless ILC Camera ("EF-really right") with still another lens assortment. No way!

1. I want to skip purchase of another DSLR 2. I want to skip purhcasing any further APS-C cameras3. I want to move right on to a compact, hi-performance FF mirrorless ILC with * excellent sensor* fast contrast+in-sensor-plane Phase-AF* hi-end EVF * full ergonomic controls [i.e. 2 wheels! ] * at max. 1/3 of the cost of a Leica M system - so basically at the price of Sony RX-1

The first company to offer this, will be my next camera system vendor. :-)

That's fine, but just be prepared to wait YEARS before that happens and even longer for a new set of lenses to take advantage of the new mount. Until then, enjoy your current APS-C.

(...)1. I want to skip purchase of another DSLR 2. I want to skip purhcasing any further APS-C cameras3. I want to move right on to a compact, hi-performance FF mirrorless ILC with * excellent sensor* fast contrast+in-sensor-plane Phase-AF* hi-end EVF * full ergonomic controls [i.e. 2 wheels! ] * at max. 1/3 of the cost of a Leica M system - so basically at the price of Sony RX-1 (...)

My wishlist is very similar, with the difference that I don't care about sensor size as long as image quality is good. Both the Olympus OM-D EM-5 and the Fuji X-Pro1/X-E1 look nice to me, and rumor has it that newer models will be available by the end of the year, when I'll think it through.

Canon cannot even make a good APS-C mirrorless. People are asking FF from Canon??? Dream on!! Don't get me wrong, I like mirrorless. Like the other poster says, if Canon comes up with a GOOD mirrorless, even in APS-C, I will jump on it.

It's a starting point for Sony. I didn't see 35mm fixed as boring lens, I took over 2K photos last couple weeks with my RX1. My 5D III and all EF lenses been sitting in the bag lately - NOW, that is boring

Agree, 35mm for FF is the most versatile lens. In the old film days, while a good lens cost 1/2 month of wage, people used 35mm as their main lens. I know people travelled around the world with a 35mm and a 90mm lens. For the film point and shoot, 40mm is the fixed lens.

Does the phrase "perfuming the pig" come to mind. Canon was way late to the market, took it's strike and whiffed terribly. They have the money to try again, but the train has left the station. By the way,my Fuji XE and several lenses look a lot like what Canon should have offered.

Logged

canon rumors FORUM

What I don't understand is when everyone here claims the full frame can't be done, why not use the same basic body of the 6D without the mirror/viewfinder? No it would not be pocket-able - my sony nex 5n is not pocket-able, but it would reduce weight and size while still functioning just like mk111.

I wouldn't go to a job without two bodies in my camera bag I just would prefer if that second or third backup camera while having the exact same sensor characteristics of the main body could also be designed in it's own unique way. In this case as small as possible for those times when I want to go hiking, street scenes, video work, mounting in unusual places and don't want a full size dslr. (funny I use to strictly use a 4x5)

After using the sony nex I've come to one conclusion there are two size cameras one is point n shoot pocket-able and the second needs to go in a bag.

Here's my analogy (I'm not a golfer or a gopher) it seems Canon keeps making all these different cameras to be all to every use instead of making each camera body unique to help with specific problems. A golfer doesn't carry around a bag full of 9 irons or (do I dare:-) a bag full of woods. Nor is their putter manufactured significantly inferior to his driving wood because it's a lesser tool.

Yes mirrorless cameras are here to stay however I disagree they need to be a whole new system, but I'm only a photographer(tool user) not an engineer.

What I don't understand is when everyone here claims the full frame can't be done, why not use the same basic body of the 6D without the mirror/viewfinder? No it would not be pocket-able - my sony nex 5n is not pocket-able, but it would reduce weight and size while still functioning just like mk111.

I wouldn't go to a job without two bodies in my camera bag I just would prefer if that second or third backup camera while having the exact same sensor characteristics of the main body could also be designed in it's own unique way. In this case as small as possible for those times when I want to go hiking, street scenes, video work, mounting in unusual places and don't want a full size dslr. (funny I use to strictly use a 4x5)

After using the sony nex I've come to one conclusion there are two size cameras one is point n shoot pocket-able and the second needs to go in a bag.

Here's my analogy (I'm not a golfer or a gopher) it seems Canon keeps making all these different cameras to be all to every use instead of making each camera body unique to help with specific problems. A golfer doesn't carry around a bag full of 9 irons or (do I dare:-) a bag full of woods. Nor is their putter manufactured significantly inferior to his driving wood because it's a lesser tool.

Yes mirrorless cameras are here to stay however I disagree they need to be a whole new system, but I'm only a photographer(tool user) not an engineer.

If Canon were to make a mirrorless camera using the same EF lenses, then it wouldn't be much smaller because the mount size/design remains the same and it affects lens size.

If Canon were to make a mirrorless camera using a new mount, then wide to normal focal length lenses might get a bit smaller, but the large aperture telephoto lenses will be nearly the same size. Anyone thinking that a 400 f/2.8 will be a lot smaller for a FF mirrorless camera than it currently is does not have reasonable expectations. One of Canon's advantages is its large selection of lenses available. Redesigning all the lenses for a new mount will take YEARS although an adapter can help lessen the transition pain.

I think Canon will eventually get to FF mirrorless bodies, but it will be a slow transition as technologies develop and production costs fall for the newer technologies (EVF at the same quality as the pentaprisms, etc.). The other issue is that APS-Cs outsell FFs, so it's natural that Canon would address that larger segment with the EOS-M first. I'd be tempted to get a 2nd generation EOS-M if it had improved AF for the wife and as a backup camera. For lowlight and shallow DOF, I'd want to use fast primes anyway and those are not pocketable anyway...

The main thing I'd want if I were going to by an M is a standard zoom that folds entirely inside the body when not in use. Since I don't see that happening, I can't see this system ever becoming interesting.

A little too late I just sold a Sony Nex 6 and bought an M with both lenses.Don't belive all the hype I thought it sucked. The battery lasted about an hour the iq is not as good as the M.It's always is focusing and no way to turn it off andeats batteries like candy.It does focus a little faster for sure,but it's no SLR either.Also do any of you naysayers here actually own one?

A little too late I just sold a Sony Nex 6 and bought an M with both lenses.Don't belive all the hype I thought it sucked. The battery lasted about an hour the iq is not as good as the M.It's always is focusing and no way to turn it off andeats batteries like candy.It does focus a little faster for sure,but it's no SLR either.Also do any of you naysayers here actually own one?

Yes I do have a Nex-6

I agree it can be heavy on power use but that also depends on the lens in use (ie powerzoom vs manual zoom or prime) and proper power management settings. I've a second battery just in case it runs out.

IQ, I don't know what you're on about. It's stunning - better than the 7D.

Does the phrase "perfuming the pig" come to mind. Canon was way late to the market, took it's strike and whiffed terribly. They have the money to try again, but the train has left the station. By the way,my Fuji XE and several lenses look a lot like what Canon should have offered.

They(Fuji) are also twice the price.I owned one(EX-1) it doesn.t focus very fast either,it was no better than my M and by the way do own an EOS-M or have tried one,I didn't think so.